DPP v Kiely

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 19 February 2008
• Docket Number: [C.C.A. No: 61/07]
• Date: 19 February 2008
• Court: Court of Criminal Appeal

Between/

Richard Kiely

Applicant

and

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

[C.C.A. No: 61/07]

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Abstract:

Criminal law - Reactivation of sentence - Proportionality and totality of sentence - Whether the learned trial judge erred in principle in reactivating the suspended sentence.

Facts: The applicant pleaded guilty to various counts of dangerous driving and associated charges on three separate occasions and was sentenced to two years imprisonment on each. Those sentences were consecutive but were suspended for a period of six years on certain conditions. Following a conviction for public order offences in the District Court, the learned trial judge reactivated four years of the suspended sentence imposed and suspended the last sentence of two years for two years. The applicant submitted that the learned trial judge erred in principle in failing to have regard to the principles of proportionality and totality in imposing a six year suspended sentence for road traffic offences, and then reactivating four years of the sentence following conviction of the applicant for minor public order offences.

Held by Court of Criminal Appeal (Denham J. (Feeney, McGovern JJ) (ex tempore) in refusing the application: That this appeal related to the reactivated sentence, which the trial judge had a discretion to impose. Originally, the learned trial judge carefully crafted a sentence relating to the offences and the circumstances of the applicant and by suspending the sentence gave the applicant a chance to improve his circumstances. The applicant did not seize the opportunity and re-offended. There was no error in principle in the reactivated sentence, which was a variation of the original sentences imposed.

Reporter: L.O'S.

1 Ex tempore Judgment of the Court delivered the 19th February, 2008 by Denham J.

2 This is an application for leave to appeal by Richard Kiely, 'the applicant'.

3 The applicant was arraigned on the 24th October, 2005 and pleaded guilty to the unauthorised use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, reckless endangerment, dangerous driving, driving without insurance and driving while intoxicated, on the 16th April, 2005. The applicant was arraigned on the 6th February, 2006 and pleaded guilty to the unauthorised use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, reckless endangerment, dangerous driving, driving without insurance and driving while intoxicated, on the 23rd April, 2005. On the 6th February, 2006 the applicant was arraigned and pleaded guilty to the unauthorised use of a mechanically propelled vehicle, reckless endangerment, dangerous driving and driving while intoxicated on the 26th May, 2005.

4 On the 18th October, 2006 the learned trial judge imposed a sentence of two years for the offences committed on the 16th April, 2005, a two year sentence for the offences committed on the 23rd April, 2005, and a two year sentence for the offences committed on the 26th May, 2005, and held that the sentences were to be consecutive. Thus the applicant was sentenced to a total of six years imprisonment, and...